Patna High Court
Nripendra Kumar SIngh @ Nipendra SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SHAILENDRA SINGH
Holding
The trial court's order taking cognizance of IPC sections 376 and 385 against the appellants is set aside as it was based on a mechanical approach.
Summary
The appellants, parents of the alleged co-accused, appealed against an order of the Special Judge (SC/ST) that took cognizance of offences under IPC sections 341, 323, 376 and 385, as well as sections of the SC/ST Act and the IT Act. They contended that the FIR contained no allegation against them for the rape‑related offences (376 and 385) and that the trial court had mechanically included them without applying judicial mind. The State argued that sufficient prima facie material existed under the SC/ST Act for caste‑based abuse offences. The Patna High Court held that the trial court erred in taking cognizance of sections 376 and 385 against the appellants, as the FIR exclusively implicated their son. Consequently, the court set aside that part of the order and directed the trial court to pass a fresh order on cognizance for the appellants, while leaving the order against the co‑accused untouched. The appeal was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the trial court correctly took cognizance of IPC sections 376 and 385 against the appellants.
- Whether there is a prima facie case under the SC/ST Act (sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(w)(2)(va)) against the appellants.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 376, 385
- Information Technology Act — s. 67A
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 14A(1), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(w)(2)(va)
Subjects
- SC/ST Act
- cognizance
- IPC
- rape
- mechanical approach
- criminal appeal
- prima facie case
- caste based abuse
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.555 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2024 Thana- JAMALPUR District- Munger
======================================================
1. Nripendra Kumar Singh @ Nipendra Singh, Son of Natho Singh Resident of
Mohalla - Basudeopur, Near Nand Kumar High School, P.S. - Kotwali,
District - Munger
2. Seema Singh, Wife of Nripendra Kumar Singh @ Nipendra Singh, Resident
of Mohalla - Basudeopur, Near Nand Kumar High School, P.S. - Kotwali,
District - Munger
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Aarushi Chaudhary, Daughter of Anil Chaudhary, Resident of Khalasi
Mohalla, Mohanpur, Jamalpur, P.S. - Jamalpur, District - Munger
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Prince Kumar Mishra, Adv.
Ms. Priyanka Kumari, Adv
For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, (Spl. PP.)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
7 02-07-2026 The instant appeal has been filed under Section
14A(1) of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities Act), (in short 'SC/ST Act') with a prayer to quash
the order dated 03.12.2024 taking cognizance of the offences
punishable under Sections 341, 323, 376, 385 of the Indian
Penal Code (in short 'IPC') and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and
3(w)(2)(va) of SC and ST Act and Section 67A of the I.T. Act
passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST) Act-cum-Additional
District Judge, 1st Munger, in connection with Jamalpur P.S.
Case No. 98 of 2024.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.555 of 2025(7) dt.02-07-2026
2/4
2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants
submits that the order impugned is completely bad in the eye of
law in so far as it relates to the appellants with respect to the
offences punishable under Sections 376 and 385 of the Indian
Penal Code (in short 'IPC') as there is not even a whisper in the
entire FIR regarding any role of both the appellants in the
commission of the offences under Sections 376 and 385 of the
IPC, all the allegations relating to these offences are against
the son of the appellants, despite this fact the learned trial court
while taking cognizance of the aforesaid offences along with
other offences under the IPC, SC/ST Act and I.T. Act,
summoned the appellants as well, observing that a prima facia
case was made out against them in respect of all these offences.
This, according to the learned counsel, clearly reflects a
mechanical approach on the part of the trial court. It is further
submitted that the main part of the allegation is against the son
of the appellants and the FIR clearly shows that the appellants
were made accused by the respondent no. 2 only to harass them
on account of their relationship as parents of the co-accused
Nilendra Kumar Singh and further the allegation made in the
last portion of the FIR against the appellants that while abusing
the informant/respondent no. 2, appellants started compelling
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.555 of 2025(7) dt.02-07-2026
3/4
her to establish an illicit relationship with their son, is wholly
unbelievable. However, learned trial court failed to take into
consideration the findings of the investigation and the materials
available in the case diary, particularly the statements of
independent witnesses.
3. No one appears on behalf of the respondent no.2,
despite service of notice upon her.
4. Learned APP appearing for the state submits that in
so far as the allegation of caste based abuse is concerned the
trial court has rightly taken the cognizance of the offences under
Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(w)(2)(va) of SC/st Act as sufficient
prima facia materials exist to attract the said offences against
the appellants.
5. Considering the aforesaid submissions and taking
note of the allegations levelled by the respondent no. 2 in her
FIR, this court finds substance in the submissions advanced on
behalf of the appellants as the learned trial court adopted a
mechanical approach while passing impugned order insofar as it
relates to the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 385 of
the IPC against the appellants. A plain reading of the FIR
reveals that the allegation relating to the said offences are
exclusively against the son of the appellants, which was not
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.555 of 2025(7) dt.02-07-2026
4/4
properly appreciated by the trial court. Hence, the impugned
order to the extent it takes cognizance of the offences under
Sections 376 and 385 of the IPC against the appellants and
summoning them for the said offences on account of being
mechanical and reflective of non-application of judicial mind, is
hereby, set aside to the extent of the appellants only.
6. The trial court is directed to pass a fresh order in
accordance with law on the question of cognizance insofar as
the appellants are concerned without being prejudiced with this
order. It is made clear that the impugned order taking
cognizance of the alleged offences against the co-accused shall
remain unaffected by this order.
7. With above observation and direction the present
appeal stands allowed.
(Shailendra Singh, J)
Rajiv/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.